At the start of QuakeLive, the european CTF scene from Quake 3 moved onto the new game. The standard still was 5v5.
But some time later, id software's method released a map called Ironworks. Definetly a good map. For 4v4.
Therefore, the European community was forced to make a decision, also influenced by the quakecon CTF format: use the 4v4 system in order to use a decent mappool. Fair enough. I eagerly followed the movement! But now that we have the possibility to use maps like japanese castles, shining forces... Hell even maybe Courtyard (edited), Stonekeep (I like!) and Industrial Accident... Why not give 5v5 a chance again ?

I have played pretty high level for extended periods in both 4v4 and 5v5 (and even 6v6 if we go back far enough!). I definately prefer 5v5, the amount of flag action and constant pressure that you can get in a lot of 5v5 matches is missing from most 4v4. Note I say 'can' because of course in 5v5 if it's played negatively enough you will have boring matches too! The difference for me is the general gameplay that is not reflected by final scores.

For me good CTF should be about last ditch returns, team-caps and the decisions people make when both flags are out! Not just about fragging power, PU control and stacking a guy up for a powerup run or a sneak attack every few mins! A lot of the time in high level 4v4 it is almost like the teams are taking turns at attacking whilst in 5v5 there are enough personnel to force action at both flags most of the time. In 4v4 attackers are often found having to defend or just chasing a stacked nme player round mid! Also in 4v4 it seems to me that usually the teams who take risks get punished and the teams who play it safe grind out results, this is not what ctf should be like!

4v4 is just much more about fragging – look at almost all 4v4 matches and the team with frag domination wins, whilst back in 5v5 quite often tdm style teams would lose despite heavily outfragging their opposition – you don't see that very often in 4v4. This is probably why people complain about the amount of respawners in 5v5 and how when you get the flag you can't get out because of respawns. 5v5 requires more teamplay and actually makes fragging too much a disadvantage. In even matches capping usually requires you to have an escort WITH you rather than sitting in mid waiting for you.

Some people say that 4v4 is more tactical than 5v5 and that may be true in the sense of timing items/powerups, stacking people, deciding when to take a risk and do a 3 man attack. But 5v5 is more about on-the-fly teamplay, it's very hard to get caps without synced attacks and escorts with you, unlike 4v4 where a lot of caps are about 1 guy sneaking in and getting the flag to mid hoping your team have it locked down.

There is also an argument that 4v4 is 'better' because each player has more responsibility which doesn't hold up for me. If that is the case surely 2v2 would be best!

Just the balance of having an odd number of players is imo what makes 5v5 more fun. The general balance in 5v5 is usually 3 attackers against 2 defenders. In 4v4 it's usually 2/2 with an occasional 3 man attack when you get a guy stacked or get a PU. For example if you compare them on Japan Castles in 5v5 the best teams were the offensive ones (FOE etc.) while in 4v4 a lock down defensive style seemed to do the best (519). 5v5 involves more of what I call 'pure' ctf, fast paced, making quick on-the-fly decisions, lots of pressure, both teams having plenty of flagtime while 4v4 needs a slower more calculated approach.

When it comes to high level teams 4v4 is more about control and aim. Look at the recent Quad cup a couple of months back which was full of boring matches, even shoutcasting it was boring! The only time you get a highscoring match seems to be when teams go behind and have to attack more (leaving them exposed at the back). Then go back further to the osp ctf 4v4 quakecons which were interesting because of the EU/US meetings but boiled down to essentially dull matches. Look at the success of 519 and even IC in 4v4 at quakecons both with little ctf experience, it indicates that all you really need for 4v4 ctf is 4 high level aimers with some basic comms.

Of course I'm not saying 4v4 ctf is bad I just think 5v5 is more fun. Some people will always prefer the less chaotic 4v4 but for me and hopefuly lots of others chaos is the breeding ground for great ctf moves! It's a shame there arn't vod's around of some of those classic matches where ITG'Lun couldn't keep up with the action!

here is what Vium had so say about 4v4/5v5. (more valid opinion)
I have hardly played any ctf, but when I did it was always on top level.
The game is campy, boring, and half the games go to overtime. change ql CTF to cpm rules and it will be improved alot.
Talking about 4v4/5v5 is like choosing between aids and cancer.

When i first played CTF it was at QL and it was 4v4. There was ctf7 and this is what im used to. Now 3wave maps time has come along with 5v5 mode... CTF scene need a lot of time to get used to it. Q3 veterans got no probs with that, "new" guys (like me) will have a hard time if it will become common to play 5v5

lol man. The old 5v5 matches were epic to watch.. I would stick around all night to see them great ones play.. gzd being my favorit by far <3.. These days I can hardly stay tuned for 10 minutes because of being bored to dead..

I think 5v5 will work even better in QL than it did in Q3 because of the reduced railgun and mg damage. Couple with the reduced splash damage from rocketjumping and increased movement speed, I think "grab and run" attempts are going to be a lot more successful. Basically aim has slightly less significance than in q3.

i <3 ctf7 to the death and i think it suits 4v4 best... but most of the maps *like the fucking old maps that id introduced again seem to be more suitable for 5v5.. I mean, they are just way too large and I don't want to sit in base for like 2 mins with nobody coming in!

I'm really torn at the moment in terms of ctf.. I feel that in 5v5 my "skill" is less important because I've got like 500 defs anyway spawning in front of the base or being in mid and what not. I guess I should switch over to TDM again where a person's fragging power actually matters.

Maybe it is, but honestly if you want to outfrag your opponent doesn't TDM suit you better?

I'm a bad ctf player as I tend to fight too much. It's about bringing the nme flag to your base.

So, TDM main goal is to frag more then the enemy and CTF is about capturing the flag more then the enemy. So you could say it's personal preference, but then you are kinda missing the point of CTF imo :)

well anyway, don't see whats the problem in 1-0 games as long as I have fun.

4v4 feels heavily more random than 5v5 anyway. In so many games ending 3-4 or 4-3 or 3-2 or 3-1 etc you know that you could've taken it with a bit more luck or a bit less luck for the opposite team.

That's usually random when the only valuable tactic there is in 4v4 ctf is: get your second def to stack up and attack once every 2 min (4 if the other team attacked first with another stacked enemy and the stacks all disappeared) etc.

This was very very very boring ctf if you ask me... Also those stacked attacks worked once in a while, mostly due to random luck by either side...

whilst in 5v5 those 'stackup playing defensive then rush enemy base when 100-200+medkit' hardly happens, what counts more is to make synced attacks with 1 or 2 mates with you and try and overwhelm the 1-2 defenders there are. What happens there in 5v5 is you dont have that much of randommidspawnluck as in 4v4. You have to escort your flag to your own base, and not just wait for him to come accross mid...

It's another way of playing but it certainly isnt more random or more defensive or less tactical.

Yes, a 1-0 game with endlessly attacking and failing for 14 minutes straight, because the opponent got a cap and went defensive, is awesome fun. If you think clans play alldef now, wait until 5v5 and being a capture behind.

Also, I remember that a lot of the top players in Q3CTF (thefou, broken players,etc) wanted to change to 4v4 instead of 5v5. I have no idea why they would want to change from such a thrilling style of gameplay.

Now back to sources and what made ctf so satisfying, regardless of the mongoloids/retards that appreciated 5v5 (which represent easily 85% of the votes in favour of 5v5 if you check at the voters list).

You should be able to make better points.

My concerns:
*CTF becoming more chaotic
*Defensive play
*The fact that a change to 5v5 means that the community needs to grow 25% to be able to play the same amount of matches.
*Arranging matches getting even more troublesome.
*Dismissing new maps for old maps.

No I haven't said anywhere that my concerns are more valuable than derfel's arguments. But I have been downplaying derfel's arguments as you were taking them for true.

And it's fine that you like 5v5 more based on your past experience, just don't vomit a shitload of arguments that can be used either way.

The reason that I'm not actually throwing out a bunch of arguments about 4v4 vs 5v5 is because I haven't played q3ctf and therefore am stating these concerns.

And to answer the question why I think it's bad now. First of all, I don't think it's bad post-update, but tournaments would have to prove that. Pre-update it was bad as the mappool consisted of at least 2 maps that were considered crap (c3 and c10 for the reference), and maps like c2 and c8 that cater towards defensive playstyles. Together with tournaments that were run in a crappy matter, a disconnection of the public players and the competitive players, the fact that many peolpe got tired of QL in general and the fact that the QL community never was big are all factors to ctf's current state. Just blaming 4v4 is simply short-sighted.

q3ctf went downhill when the TDM players started to play and dominate games thrashing the "CTF" teams and then winning tournaments against each other 0-0 0-0 1-0 by having 2 def 2 mid 1 attack and generally just abusing VQ3 CTF weapons/maps/strategy.

Notice how all the arguments are basically "us CTF'ers always played 5vs5 and it was hella fun, these TDM'ers like 4vs4 because it's just about frags" or some ridiculous bullshit variant of that (then you get a list of "ctf names" such as derfel/vertex who agree).

Nobody wants to look at the actual issues with CTF and why it's all but dead, they just want to bring back their nostalgic memories.

The idea that it'll be fine because MG/LG/RG are weaker is nulled by the fact that the netcode is far superior to OSP, the SG is insanely powerful and everyone has lower ping anyway.

5 MG was too powerful in TDM for years during OSP, let alone the 7 MG from CTF and the LG/RG are barely weaker at all.

The argument that cp1/cp5 are "too big" is silly as well since the Americans played 4vs4 on those maps for years just fine.

The only thing switching to 5vs5 will do is please a small section of ex-Q3CTF players who stopped playing because it didn't feel like it did 5 years ago who will soon stop when they realise it still sucks with zero community (Hi at needing one extra [premium] player)

q3ctf went downhill when the TDM players started to play and dominate games trashing the "CTF" teams and then winning tournaments against each other 0-0 0-0 1-0 by having 2 def 2 mid 1 attack and generally just abusing VQ3 CTF weapons/maps/strategy.

This. People are on and on about two periods in Q3CTF:
2000-2002, when Quake was rather new, people had not so great aim, so rocketjumping and flagrunning skills mattered.
2006-2009, when 90% of the skilled players had stopped playing

The period around 2003-2005 is what I would call the golden era of Q3CTF, it had the highest activity, it had the most high skill teams around, Quakecon had LAN competitions, etc. This period is also characterized by turning to 0-0 0-0 1-0 sets of games, where the winning strategy in CTF started to become much more defensive and fragpower based instead of "massive attack" that everyone seems to be on about. In that period, clans started to recruit TDM superstars who had awesome aim but not that much traditional CTF sense (ex. ironbyte, foggen), and it was a winning strategy. It was the evolution of CTF, and there is no reason to think that in 2010 it wouldn't work again.

You're praising a format where you need 4 aimwhores, because 3 is gonna cost you the game against 4 other aimwhores, who have basic knowledge of how to stack up and attack once every 3 minutes.
At each of these 3 minutes, there's a ~50% chance a cap occurs, mainly depending on luck factors such as:

1. whether the enemy team spawns behind you or infront of you
2. whether your mates spawn in mid or far away in your base.
3. various random fails while you're running with the flag (minor)

Then you have games ending with a score varying between 2 to 5 caps depending on how lucky you mainly were, for both teams.
Hence the so-called great scoring 4v4 gives. But that's just a mere impression. Why should the scores be a reference to why CTF is better or not anyway ?

'Action packed', 'team support', 'overwhelming' should be keywords for a good CTF game in my opinion !

You're praising a format where you need 4 aimwhores, because 3 is gonna cost you the game against 4 other aimwhores, who have basic knowledge of how to stack up and attack once every 3 minutes.

You're praising a format where you need 5 aimwhores, because 4 is gonna cost you the game against 5 other aimwhores, who have basic knowledge of how to stack up and attack once every 3 minutes.

We've been there before and that's what happened. Whether you want to call it the "Goldenage" or not doesn't really matter, that is when the skill level in Q3CTF peaked.

Your entire argument is basically just a nostalgic trip down memory lane or based on pickup play with like minded people. Guess what I can find people who think all sorts of things are a good idea, doesn't mean they are good ideas.

The argument that cp1/cp5 are "too big" is silly as well since the Americans played 4vs4 on those maps for years just fine.

I only need to take that quote out of your wall of random bull**** to show how wrong you are.

Where do we say that cp1/cp5 is too big anywhere in this thread?
We just said it played (and still plays) great in 5v5. And hell I played a shitload of ctf pickups since we switched to 5v5 and yeah, I can tell it's definetly more fun, so I think your other argument about my chances to find it beeing boring aswell after a while are fairly low.

You haven't shown how wrong I am, you try this method of arguing all the time and it doesn't make sense.

I didn't say anyone in this thread had said that, but that doesn't mean that argument doesn't exist. You even get people saying Siberia is too big for 4v4 so heaven knows what they'll think of cp1/cp5.

What bearing does you having played a "shitload" of CTF pickups on 5v5 and having "more fun" have on this debate at all?

I've played a "shitload" of CTF in 4v4 and I can tell you definitively that it is the far superior mode in every possible way!

- tdmers/duellers who anyway never play CTF, be it 4v4 or 5v5 (noctis, krysa...)

- people who started playing CTF with quakelive on 4v4 and have near to zero experience to how 5v5 feels

those two categories taking up atleast 60% of the 35 votes.

The others I don't know, maybe a few trollvotes like forecast who admitted he had voted for 4v4 randomly just to hide the poll, also probably some people at the top of the game with their team at the moment and are scared they might loose their recent domination of a dead mode completely deserted by most of the best ctf players there was at the beginning of ql...

Again, this is not an argument for 5vs5. The fact that some people like 4v4 and others like 5v5 (strangely enough, those who played 5v5 for like a decade!) has no bearing on the amount of players that should be on each team.

Get over yourself and your mates nostalgic egos and make some proper arguments or put your money where your mouth is and run a tournament/league and prove there's enough interested for the whole community to give in to your wish.

Have you seriously no idea how bad your arguments are? Can't you see that nearly every argument you put out there could completely be turned around in favour of 4v4?

Your arguments:
*The voters that voted 4v4 shouldn't have a voice (Heck I reckon the majority of the voters here don't play ctf)
*Old players saying something (They haven't played a lot of 4v4 / They aren't all-knowing / they don't have a greater opinion)
*I'm more experienced than you! (So let's all ask q3ctf players what they like!)
*q3ctf was awesome and qlctf isn't (The amount of teams in CB q3ctf show trends of less teams every year)
*5v5 is so more attack-heavy (The CB pages of the EC finals that got linked extremely low scoring games)
*Stuff at quakecon show X (Quakecon isn't a prime example of a big regressive test)

And it's funny that you throw with percentages as if you've done a statistical analysis about them.

Just fucking accept that this stuff is completely subjective and that you aren't a right as you claim you are. You just like 5v5 more than 4v4, good for you.

Now I know what you're gonna say, and I don't care if it goes beyond what you consider is 'the debate', I just wanted to point out just how easy it was to guess that you weren't a proper CTF fan...

Also looking at sc00t's past CTF achievments since he [+ed] you on the 'greater experience' post and wow, that iMmune tdm clan did play a few summercups on 4v4 !

No wonder he praises 4v4 again now ! But sc00t is wrong, I never said q3ctf was bad on 4v4, it was indeed well pleasant sometimes and I did play a lot of summercups/clan scrims on 4v4, but it just doesnt suit qlctf.

"Research"????? I can see you now, going through all my old posts, spamming on irc "Who is this iNkind guy? I must know since he's disagreeing with me on the internet and I need to reassure myself of how I'm superior and more knowledgable"

Get a grip, honestly, there's nothing you can dig up on me that would prove I know nothing about CTF (though I'm sure you'll convince yourself otherwise).

Am I a TDM fan? Yeah but that is neither here nor there and doesn't tell us anything about my CTF "fan" status or knowledge.

Also looking at sc00t's past CTF achievments since he [+ed] you on the 'greater experience' post and wow, that iMmune tdm clan did play a few summercups on 4v4 !

How old are you? Just for your information that "iMmune TDM clan" has also been playing TDM/CTF cups/leagues since 2004 and that is both 4v4 and 5v5 CTF (and played CTF in another game before Q3).

No wonder he praises 4v4 again now !

I'm slightly confused, sc00t has played with iMmune for less than a year as far as I know (as in, not in Q3) so why would it be "again"?

Why is QLCTF more suited to 5v5?

As for those polls. There wasn't an option for "Don't play anymore QL" so I took that option and no, I won't pay any of my own money for QL so I am currently not playing QL.

I played Div1 Q3CTF for 6 years, including the period of 2003-2005 where the skill level and amount of players peaked. If I remember correctly, you played back in Div3 back then, so that pretty much gives me more/better experience than you.

The others I don't know, maybe a few trollvotes like forecast who admitted he had voted for 4v4 randomly just to hide the poll, also probably some people at the top of the game with their team at the moment and are scared they might loose their recent domination of a dead mode completely deserted by most of the best ctf players there was at the beginning of ql...

damn you were right, I guess I dont even remember those boring matches!

All I see is games won, even vs k1ck, and then a forfeit loss.

So yeah, I deffo got raped last season with my clan, hence why I want 5v5 back so I can dominate again... lol

EDIT: I dont think we played BiBS, we had 0 activity last season (last 6 months) due to the insane boringness of the mode oO (I had more fun in tdm by then, if I have to play tdm anyway, I rather it has no flags I guess)

also back then I was playing with a clan of friends, french speakers, and I was arguably their best player and I couldve just joined a better clan, that wasn't really my goal at the time I was just having fun.

And no, I never played in any div3 clan, I was mainly in the middle-top of division 2 tables and toward the end I left soulsclan and started playing with better teams like 287 with spartie and dp.

So no, you playing in a better clan than I did has no real influence to how experience plays there. Might I add that I was also mercing sometimes with better teams.

Agreed. But, dem0n is talking about giving 5v5 a chance and the OP is talking about it beeing a bad idea simply coz ppl wont be able to field a FULL team of 5.
Imo THAT is not an argument against going back to the roots and standards @ EU.ctf scene.
I'd also like to point out that 4v4 CTF in Europe isn't a big success and would argue that its easy to fill up toruneys using that format - but thats debatable.
All i am saying: CTF = 5v5, and we are using 4v4 simply because its easier to field a team and 'the European community was forced to make a decision, also influenced by the quakecon CTF format: use the 4v4 system in order to use a decent mappool'

While dem0n has made it sound like he is just suggesting it is given a chance he is in fact making an argument that it should not only come back but it would be better.

Otherwise why create a poll on ESR rather than just setup a 5v5 CTF cup if not to curry favour?

The "roots and standards" argument is just as much a non-argument anyway It's also the most annoying and negative argument anyone could ever make, if changing to 5v5 would be so positive then state positive progressive reasons.

Hypothetically lets say that 3v3 was superior to 4v4 mechanically, would it make sense to argue for 4v4 because of "roots and standards"?

Regressive and negative decisions (e.g. map pools) are why Q3/QL TDM/CTF are dead, not some arbitrary team size.

I'd like to add that the CTF community wasn't forced to do anything, when TDM and duel switched to CPMA the CTF community stuck with OSP and they could have done so instead of playing 4v4 QLCTF.

Well that poll would suggest that there is a need for discussion... so that we know if there's a chance for ppl to actually sign up for said 5v5 QL CTF tourney.
About that 'roots and standards' thingy and 3v3 vs. 4v4 - simple answer: no .
I am talking about standards, because i feel like that 5v5 standard BECAME 'standard' simply because it is the proper way of playing a Capture the Flag mod using Quake 3 Arena game specificaly - and i also feel like, having decent maps, its the best way for Quakelive.
And yes, EU CTF scene was actually forced to use 4v4 simply because it was the proper way to play Quake Live at the time coz of the lack of MAPS that would allow a decent 5v5 competition - there was no choice so to speak [ @ OSP vs. CPMA - we had choicce there. ]
Don't want to argue or anything, that is just my opinion there, also i am not against 4v4 CTf its just i wont be participating in those tourneys or if i will i wont have fun playing tdm with flags, thats all ...

That's not an argument and that's my point. The fact that 5v5 "became" standard doesn't matter in this discussion.

The choice was between OSP Q3CTF with lots of maps and people who like 5v5 CTF and QL CTF with 3 (?) maps and played 4v4. Nobody forced any of you to play QL instead.

If you want to know if people will sign up for a 5v5 CTF tourney, make a news post with dates set and say the tournament will only go ahead if there is X amount of teams. It's quite easy and there's no need for redundant polls that do not even correctly gauge interest.

It is planned that we are gonna have 5v5 leagues, so get over with this and also please get over with this argument-nevrose you seem to have, there's a poll, we gave our opinion, 5v5 is winning and the world is good.

Now that we have both showed that there's a strategic approach in both formats, 4v4 and 5v5, I want you to tell me:

1. why it is funnier than 5v5.
2. why you dont think 5v5 will gather more interest than 4v4.
3. why you think high scoring random games are better.

1. I don't think either is more fun than the other
2. I don't think 5v5 will gather more interest because Team QL is dead and the player base of QL isn't big enough or growing
3. Yeah, I was arguing high scoring random games are better (What about the low scoring games that we had in 5v5? Oh wait, you like 5v5 so those weren't random)

I hope CTF can be main tourney mode in Quake Live. I'm sure that all pro's will play it and enjoy, if org. start to put it as main mode on there events! CTF 5v5, more new big maps like stonekeep, and it can be REAL FUN.

remember that this is not Quake 3, is QuakeLive! if you want to play Quake 3 style, install and play.
ironwork is a very fun map and you have to play if or (4v4)
but the other maps (CP1 CP5) could play 5v5, and have a non-rigid in number of players.
could well be 4v4 and 5v5 at the same time depending on the map.

im going to completely ignore what your post says as you seem to be doing that to everyone else

i was a big fan of 5v5 ctf in osp and i played up until everyone switched to cpma due to new updates and various leagues adopting it. i would have loved to continue playing ctf but the community was ludicrously stubborn and refused to swap to cpma - which i feel led to the downfall of the once popular vanilla mode (see cb cup numbers for a reference). at this point i moved over to cpm because it was just fun.

basically dont make the same mistake again by trying to alienate the mode from the general population of ql just because you and your friends however skilled or awesome they may be think it is the correct choice. at the end of the day people want to have fun and if 4v4 is fun to them then fine because it can still be just as competitive as 5v5

basically dont make the same mistake again by trying to alienate the mode from the general population of ql just because you and your friends however skilled or awesome they may be think it is the correct choice. at the end of the day people want to have fun and if 4v4 is fun to them then fine because it can still be just as competitive as 5v5

alienate fucking what, the community clearly wants 5v5. Look at the poll again ? The pickups in qlpickup.eu didnt even need this poll to start playing 5v5 again and already dozens and dozens (hundred?) of pickups have all been 5v5 and maybe a couple 4v4.
Get your head off your *** and start realizing we only switched to 4v4 because of the shitty mappool, not because it was frigging funnier.

And the community didn't switch to cpma for obvious xerp reasons. Although I didn't mind cpma and I don't see what was wrong in OSP since connections were getting better anyway.

your comprehension of the english language is laughable at times. please refrain from arguing with everyone until you are able to understand and communicate on a level higher than that of a 12 year old.

my situation was hypothetical and if its already 5v5 stop being a little bitch and go play. although i sincerely doubt you know what hypothetical means

hopefully all the leagues go with 4v4 just to spite you because you're fucking retarded bro

public servers with 12 slots ! ( why there is no /lock option ? or just 8/10 slots on server ? )

for example: We were trying ctf pracc yesterday - it take one hour to get ppl on server with invites and no public servers and again we start server and owner quit and we need to create new and then find other server and invite again ......... after one hour of this crap we played , but i was SO pissed of and also tired of creating / finding / inviting server that i was only bored in this game.

since the beginning of quakelive, there was always a lack of maps for every gametype

with ironworks, being the only new playable map at the start, ctf simply got forced to 4v4
and probably not because 4v4 was rated better than 5v5.

now, we are still not even close to a decent mappool (still lacking 3-5 maps in my opinion),
it might still be too early to play 5v5, because three maps are way too less ( i dont want to see ctf7 + ctf8 in 5v5)

as a spectator and a player, i still favor 5v5.
i have read here that some see a low scoring game as boring, but this is not duel,
with 10 players there is nonstop action.

but at the end, there are arguments against and for 5v5.
and one person will decide, not many.

One problem not mentioned is the lack of decent clans about, compared to back when 5v5 was used in q3 during it's "ctf peak". Clans used to be groups of players who practised regularly and played with each other for years. Teams developed a really good understanding of how their mates played, and developed complexed tactics. Players were able to sync better with their team, in prediction of team mates actions and good communication.

Now a days there are far fewer "true" clans and it's much more common to have merc teams and "TDM" teams. Tactically, 4v4 suits these clans, because it seems to be possible to just get a couple of really good aimers and work from a defensive standpoint. It's somewhat true in 5v5 too, but I think 4v4 makes these simple tactics more effective as there are less players and co-ordination involved, such as attacking in groups and relay runs. In a way this suits pub matches and pickups because proper tactics and teamplay isn't really possible with players you don't know. One player can be in a attack and enjoy it, worrying little about what his mates are doing, beyond meeting up for quad.

The problem is that these simple tactics are taken to official matches too. Whereas in 5v5 it's more common to have complex tactics and team members with different tasks. In 4v4, it's simpler, and quite effective, to just have the same rules for everyone. As in, all go for quad, all camp mid when flag is taken.

Players who have experienced 5v5 with a tight-nit clan know that it's much more fun. But is it realistic to expect the good old days to return? I can't imagine "real" clans returning. Most players seem to prefer the casual approach, just playing pubs and forming clans and squads on a season-by-season basis.

In my opinion, the differences in opinions here stem from people's experiences of clans and types of matches (leagues or just pubs). Those who have only played pubs or only played in merc teams haven't experienced the real fun of 5v5, but maybe never will unless ctf is taken seriously as something like duel.

I get the impression that the majority of QL players are just casual players and not really into leagues... but I could be wrong. When I look at leagues it seems to mostly be the q3 players in them, meaning that there hasn't been much growth in clan ctf, just a slight comeback.

I think the hope lies in integrated ql leagues. Getting directly to the players without the need for external sites and irc.

Perhaps 4v4 would turn out to be just as good. But don't forget we played 4v4 every summer in clanbase, and never thought it was an improvement.

I always thought (and think) that ctf 5v5 was better, some people say it's more mid heavy as in playing 2-2-1, I look at it this way: 3 attackers which consist of 2 constant attackers and one always stacking up and attacking at powerup time. There's really alot more chasing in 4v4 and well if 2 enemies are coming to my base in 4v4 I better inform my team and they'll meet 3 or 4 of us ready to take them down before they can touch the flag, I don't really know why ctf7 (as small and fast it is) was picked up, yeah 4v4 is alot better on it, just feels like everyone is playing the same role in 4v4 you can't have a constant attacker because you have to chase so your base def can be safe but in 5v5 f.e you can have roles for that (chasing). Don't really care anyway for ctf, there just wasn't anyone that actually spoke for 5v5 besides talking about experience which has nothing to do with the gamemode

I said _top level_ games in _both_ Q3 and QL, which disqualifies everyone in that list except derfel.

Anything other than Div1 experience in Q3CTF during 2003-2006 does not qualify as "top level" for Q3 in my mind, as around 2007 most of the former pros just stopped playing. Maybe because 5v5 was boring as fuck.

(edit) I only count "eurocup" winners (though I don't think gzd actually won one, but gzd was still hardcore) because those people have competitively played the absolute top level of 5v5 CTF games. The problems of balance and style in any game or gametype will always be the most profound at the very top.

but still, since the majority of the players never played or never will play at this highlevel u should consider counting skilled and experienced players votes aswell as the top player votes. which are in my oppinion the players named above.

anyway the poll says enough imo.. almost double as much votes for 5o5 as for 4o4 tho :p

We would have won a Jolt cup, ahead of reCap, 32nd and other clans you mentioned that were in Div1 along with us, but our clan died with just two or three matches before the end of the cup.

I'm not saying we were better than 32nd/aAa/gzd at our peak, but there really weren't other clans that I would have considered to have been explicitly better than us. I mean, if one of our players was later picked up for 32nd's main lineup, which was the best clan at the time, we couldn't have been that bad.

You kept implying experience isn't important, perhaps because you don't seem to have any, but now you've jumped on the opportunity to point out I haven't played high level 4v4 in ql...

I accept the fact that people with more experience than me are more likely to know what's best. But, like dem0n (i think), I don't take your opinion in very highly because I have never heard of you and the ctf community really isn't that big. If you haven't played a lot of real ctf then how do you really know what you're talking about, it isn't something you can just analyse from the outside. I don't have a problem with your opinions, just you're disregard for the significance of experience.

I accept I could be wrong about 4v4 in QL, even though I don't think it worked in Q3. But I also think the changes made in QL have made it more suitable for 5v5 than it was in q3, not less. Except perhaps, for the maplist.

It's pointless for me to write more since I'm not adding anything new, so I'm gonna drop out of this argument.

I was just pointing out that if you are going to reply to someones argument where the criteria is explicitly stated it's pretty important to keep to that criteria.

Experience here is being used as a synonym for "skill level", which is pretty absurd and still doesn't mean that said person has any real knowledge or insight. So no, I don't believe the "experience" argument being presented by many people in this thread means anything and is actually just a red herring to curry favour rather than presenting real arguments. In the same way, Spartie's post is worthless.

I hate to say this again but just look at the player careers of managers such as Arsene Wenger (modest), Alex Ferguson (modest) or even Jose Mourinho (non-existant) and yet those are the three most successful premiership managers, two have won multiple champions league and all of them have made finals, semi-finals and quarter-finals.

Clearly the ability to play top-level football is not synonymous with understanding, so why would it be true for a much less evolved and complex game as Quake CTF?

If you are playing the "I'm more experienced than you" card you better also hope there aren't people with more superior experience to you arguing the exact opposite to you.

Judge arguments based on what people say, not what they have done in the same way you would judge actions on what people have done and not what they say.

The truth is the player size doesn't really matter. CTF shouldn't be 4v4 anymore than it should be 5v5 but the choice of team size should be based upon the maps (and other game related variables, such as spawn system). In the same way, if TDM maps were way bigger it could be feasible that 5v5 TDM would be the way to go, we can see from team sports that co-ordination between more than ten per team is perfectly possible after all.

Maps designed for 5v5 are fine, however the id maps weren't ever really designed for any player size in particular, the 3wave maps were designed for CTFS or 4v4 (most of the mappers were American if I recall correctly) and so were the QL CTF maps.

The fact CTF2 was accepted as a fine map in OSP CTF by these self-titled experts tells me to not really trust their opinion on whether the QL map list warrants a change to 5v5 or not.

I didn't just hop in ql and got massively better than I was in one day...
You might wanna check out the last Nations Cups with finals with some of the best ctf players there was.

Also you just voluntarily forgot vertex in the group of people you consider 'top' and who think 5v5 is better. I can also tell you impulse was a pro-5v5 player and stopped playing when it got too boring for his liking so you might wanna add him in the list :)

#qlinvite.eu still has 4v4 games occasionally, you can ask Dimmo/bjqrn0 for a pass I guess.

The thing is, 4v4 or 5v5 is never independent of the maps you play it on. The only maps that we currently have in QL that were played in Q3CTF, are cp1 and ctf2, so there is a noticeable difference between QL and Q3.

as someone who doesnt play ctf and hasnt seen any q3ctf 5v5 games, only ql 4v4 games i can say that the 4v4 feels really dull to watch, most of the time its just watching guys die in the middle. if 5v5 makes it faster, with nicer flag runs i cant say i would be against it as a spectator. but since i dont really have good experience from either of them and all the opinions here seem to be really biased, its hard to say which would be better (for a spectator). however gerppa said 5v5 sucks so then 4v4 is better!

I would still prefer 4v4 CTF even if 5v5 might provide 'more' action. But this 'more' action is mostly regarding frags which is TDM related and will reduce the amount of tactical features that can be used in CTF.

I don't get why people would expect that 5v5 will provide better games, because this is a blindsighted statement. Most games I played in Q3CTF ended up in 0-0 1-0 2-0 1-1 or something like that between the top teams. It really took time and a lot of luck to get that cap in, even with adjusted tactics like my team used.

We invented the tactics that are used today on c10 - (q3w2) back in the day, because we wanted to mix it up against these all defensive teams which made the map end in 0-0 all the time. So we went on a server, discussed some things and decided on stacking up the main def with red and a mega and hoped for a haste to spawn. (calipt did this for us). We basically outplayed the top teams (like FOE - Gunzoids) for a few matches, but then they adopted the same thing and things ended up in 0-0 or MAYBE 1-0 again.

The main problem that I am trying to adress here is not the fact that 4v4 is better than 5v5 or around. The problems lie in the teams that play the game. When Quake Live CTF started with decent teams going and there wasn't a 1 way tactic to play, games went to higher scores. You could mix it up a lot, because there wasn't 1 tactic that played really safe.

Example: Ironworks

The first few weeks: On release this map got played 1 basedef, 1 solid mid and 2 attackers. The team with the better mid basically had the upperhand in the game, because the two attackers could run over constantly and put pressure on the defense. Worked alright, but was really an advantage for the teams who had high aimers on mid.

Second few weeks: We (broken) decided the steady mid thing wasn't working, so we went on a server and developed a tactic that involved a 1 basedef 1 ra runner and 2 attackers. No more solid midding and I did the RA running. I ran over mid with 100/100 + medkit to support attackers by raping the defense with my stack. This worked for a few weeks, because no team expected it and had to adjust for it. Raped some good teams with this tactic, but after a few weeks teams countered it.

Third few weeks: People started adapting this 1 basedef 1 ra defender 1 mid/att 1 solid attacker tactic. I think we got introduced to it by playing fnatic or LLL. This whole thing started low scoring games on Ironworks and all teams jumped on the bandwagon and did the same. Now most teams play this tactic for several months, which result in boring 1-0 1-1 2-1 games.

Now the issue with 5v5. The only reason I see 5v5 fine to play is that maps are so big that you need that extra player to compensate for the big map. Which means that the map forces that fifth player, not to improve action in games or flagruns. It depends on how maps get developed and what size they get. Currently I think ID don't really care about competitive team modes, but more to satisfy the masses to get them playing on publics.

At the moment 5v5 on the current maps except this Stonekeeps, would be retarded. Japanese castles with its new spawn system allows for 4v4 to be played effectively. I played that map in a mix team with sol4r and after killing 3 to 4 people they all spawned on our flagcarrier and one or two spawned in our own garden and got the rail. How is that remotely fair to get out of the base on that map is not THAT easy and then enemies get rewarded by fucked up spawns for another chance to counter a flag carrier. They got killed twice, they should not get a third chance because they didn't play careful enough and died.

And if you want an opinion from a player who played high level CTF in both Q3 and QL here you have it:

5v5 is noobfriendly which supports in new teams growing (advantage), but at high level it won't provide the action people desire. High aimers and 5v5 is massively defensive and WILL result in 0-0 games frequently. AND HIGH LEVEL GAMES IS WHAT PEOPLE WATCH ON STREAM.

4v4 is anti-noob and worse teams will get punished. However if enough teams are available and can be divided in good divisions, it will work out. And if teams actually showed some balls to improve. I've seen mass teams trying to hang around the division 2 levels to just avoid getting beaten by the top of the line teams. But still those teams rape division 2 and refuse to admit they play for easy wins and should actually be in division 1.

So all in all the problem lies in the teams, leagues and map development. Not in if 4v4 or 5v5 should be prefered. 4v4 is just fine. Just look at teams like EG, broken or eo/wizards. They try to mix it up and refuse to play a fixed tactic that involves 2 def 1 mid 1 att most of the time in 4v4. How do you think people will play safe in 5v5? Surely 2 def 1 mid 2 att like in the old days.

Also maps should get added more often to mix up cups and leagues to prevent the whole bandwagon tactics thing. One map will be fresh and interesting to play for 2 to 3 months. After that everyone will adopt the tactic of the most succesful team(s) and only a few teams actually got the desire and will to counter that again.

Sorry for the long texts, but after reading this topic a few times, I find it rediculous that everyone is switching to 5v5 already based on a few teams and players who quit/whine because they can't mass frag in a 5v5 game and still get away with it, because there is 4 others that will prevent the flag from leaving.

ah good post, it seems weird that people arent trying to effectively counter the tactics top teams use more than once. i doubt new playable maps will be introduced as fast as you hope for, so counterting tactics should be standard :/

* 4v4 needs more teamplay than 5v5 and it is more fast-paced, really penalizing mistakes
* People don't try to invent new tactics and develop teamplay to counter better teams.
* cp1 works nice with 4v4
* 5v5 is boring TDM/funfdef \o/

On 4v4 the team with most frags (better tdm) will have 99% victory chance. This doesnt happen at the same scale in 5v5.
4v4 is very defensive because everyone knows there aint many ppl to grab the EFC at mid like on 5v5 so its harder to get crosscaps unless team is pushing with 4 to deny the cap to the EFC.

IMHO 4v4 = tdm and team with most frags will get an opening on enemy team and eventualy win... or just do like K1ck (and many others now) TDM and win on overtime with your fraging power.

If this is the good ctf FUCK CTF this is utter bullshit.
CTF should not be about the team that frags the most but the team that can ilude enemy and go past mid without dieing or changing flags.

TBH ctf in QL is atm basically dead... this aint Q3 where u had 30 clans competing for div1 and div2 spots.

ATM u got 3 - 4 teams for div1 and the rest doesnt give a fuck about going div1 when they know they will loose.

You say 5v5 is noobfriendly... are you afraid of getting "noobed" by some randoms? I would prefer to have more "unknown" randoms that will become known in 5v5 than playing 4v4 and always seeing same shit over and over again...

This seems like Strenx playing zotac...if he plays we already know the winner...

I am not afraid of 5v5 being 'noobfriendly', I actually prefer 5v5 as individual, because it releives me from many tasks and makes it easier for me to focus on aiming and defending. That's why I like 4v4 more as well, because it gives me more tasks to do.

Look at the current maps really if you play 5v5 on japanese and c10 with the current spawn system you create so much randomness. As a player who plays high level CTF, I don't like randomness in tactics I develop with my team. We create for solid play and try to get wins, not to rely on luck.

But this 'luck' will probably get some worser teams playing again that are only capable of playing the most basic of basic tactics that is so well supported by 5v5.

And link1n said it as well, 5v5 with high aimed players is even worse especially in Quake Live. You can work around with 4v4 if you really tried and if you took the time to study the advantages of each map defensively and offensively. link1n is not a good attacker, because of his aim. He is a good attacker, because he times his attacks when the defender is running for items or is vulnerable. He doesn't brainlessly run in like 80 percent of the attackers do. Again I refer to the fault of players/teams and maybe lack of talent today?

That's why I like 4v4 more as well, because it gives me more tasks to do.

like what?

for instance, tell me how does your task as flag defender differ on c2 in 4v4 and 5v5?

anyway, that linkin statement that 5v5 in ql = chase chase chase is completely wrong. 4v4 = chase chase chase + tdm tdm tdm, in 5v5 tdming and chasing gets you close to none advantage over the other team and fragging doesn't condition you winning the match. i think that's more ctflike then some nubshit 4v4 that was forced on eu by crap map design (c) id software.

Like what? 4v4 makes the game more dynamic and I have always been the transition player from defense to mid. In 5v5 I could just stand on mid for 20 minutes and press my +attack button to shoot rails. Hard? No not really. In 4v4 if you play dynamic tactics you are hardly ever in 1 steady position. In 5v5 people complained about this 'standy mid' position which most teams played.

Don't think other maps are worth mentioning like w7. 5v5 just gives people solid positions, which makes it way too easy for each person to do their job.

On ctf7 my job was to: get our own RA's + medkits, keep mid clear on the levels where our attackers were going, support attackers in enemy base, support my basedef, get stacked for powerup, give weapons that my basedef needs etc.

My job would be in 5v5: stand on mid and rail 60% accuracy to damage enemy attackers so that the base defender(s) can kill them with no problem. Oh and sometimes support our flag carrier when it comes out of enemy base.

Why not do the same as I do in 4v4? Because 5v5 is chaotic and results in having to kill a lot. Having 3 attackers running all over your base is stupid, so having to frag a lot is essential. That's why 5v5 games end in low scores, because it is to prevent that 3 attacker push from your opponent by chase/fragging. It's safe. And maps like cp9 and cp1 are perfect for that. Give a map like w3 and you have a different story. 5v5 is actually quite doable there, because of the narrow corridors and you won't see 7 players in the same location every 20 seconds unlike cp9 and cp1.

But for now there are no maps that support 5v5 in a decent way that should promote switching. But whatever really, I can do with 5v5. It actually gives my team a big advantage not having to switch out a player every time :] Would actually have a similar lineup as broken in 2005/2006 in playstyle/skill so might give some nice games with that.

c7, c10, c2 and cp5 that are currently in Quake Live are not suitable to be played 5v5. The changes on c10 regarding spawns, layout and the extra doorway made it 4v4 friendly and possibly chaotic in 5v5.

So going to 5v5 at this very moment would only reduce the amount of very few playable maps we already have. I see most games being played on japanese castles, stonekeeps and siberia.

Haha why would we play 2 attacker 2 def? I think we didn't ever use it, since we always sticked to 1 base, 1 ra runner -> offensive and 2 attackers.

I don't think you should even bother to flame me, because your team dropped out in every league, because of your so dedicated players not being able to field a decently skilled team that knows how to play CTF.

Quite lol that Jaz comments on me though, but I don't care. New guy coming in playing CTF and then randomly flames me just to boost himself a bit and jump on the bandwagon with the rest of the tards that think 5v5 will save everything.

Going to stop replying on this topic now and see CTF get ruined for the next couple of weeks and maybe people will come to their senses at some point. Probably not seeing the community admires retards like you and the whole DP infection.

It's fine ynm, we will still remember your epic opencup wins. I know it hurts to always have been bottom of high level CTF, but no reason to support your DP mates (WOROLOLOL) by acting cool on esreality and flaming me. Just chill it's ok.

And aiming at my 'brain', lol you can't even write English on a decent level and how long have you been around?

Does it matter if I think broken invented the tactics? I sure never saw anyone play like that before we adapted that tactic in Eurocup games and other leagues. When did you start playing high level CTF? That's right just about the time any decent player quit and you had the chance to finally move up from division 2/3 to division 1. Big fucking congrats.

And just because DP tactics don't go further than a simple: 'lol I def, lol you mid, worolol you 3 attack' on teamspeak, doesn't mean the actual game is played with at least 1 mid/chasing player from each team. Stop acting like a caveman and don't pretend you know shit about high level CTF and actual tactics that come with it.

How come I cant stop laughing when I watch your demos of your EC finals at all the mistakes and shit aims then ?

DP played on a similar level as teams consisting of

Vertex, forever, linkin, draven and tua - oMg
FOE

Just check the games again please, this is by far another level. I remember playing along with most of the people from broken and I sure as hell did suck a lot then and you were certainly better than me but not to such an extent you're trying to imply.

Wether there were much lesser teams (or even top players who quit) doesn't mean the 3-4 clans that were on top at the dead era (nEu, oMg, FOE, DP) were shit compared to your 2003-04-whatever broken finals. The fact that you stopped afterwards isnt an excuse.

As much as I feel sympathy for you coming to defend your teammate, I really don't see the point in trying to compare DP to broken. Just because our aim and team play weren't perfect, doesn't mean we are worse than the four merc teams you just mentioned years later.

I mean really, there wasn't any organized team anymore past 2006. All teams were filled with mercs and sure they were skilled, but it doesn't compare to teams of players who complimented each other like aAa or 32nd.

I still find it funny that you refer to game we won the Eurocup and say: sucky aim and mistakes. Apparently it was enough to beat the top teams at that time, so I guess they were worse during that cup than us. The game vs S? was hardly a final and we were surprised that it was 'easy' compared to teams like FOE and gunzoids who were our group, quarter and semi-finals.

I don't want to sound like I think every one sucks, but seriously. At the time you refer to vertex, tua, forever, linkin and draven were hardly at the top of their game. They were either worshiped in the early 'sucky aim and many mistakes' time or developed themselves at the release of Quake 4 going into Quake Live.

And for the record: Quake Live is a game of mistakes and errors. If none were made, games would be 0-0 and boring as fuck. So I guess we made less mistakes than other teams back then to actually win cups and leagues :p

you fail to understand that i'm not talking about specifically you when I say youre broken finals but both teams weren't great if you compare to nowadays

I'm obviously defending my mate because I was also in DP and you kept saying how sucky we were and I can't just let it like that without replying to you. Players like makie or many or genz can easily be compared to you skillwise and there's no reason for you to shoot them down like you're some kind of ctf god...

EDIT: that beeing said I have nothing against you and we are all agreeing in DP etc that you're a great ctf player and you know how I always liked you etc but don't shoot DP down like that and then bring the whole 'olskool nostalgy' package it's very frustrating, even if vx, imp, ivo, etc. was a merc team, they were easily on top of their game at this time and teams like xYz were nothing but a bunch of mercs put together at the time and they did great x

No we didn't play like that. I was just refering to what most teams do while playing a 5v5 game in Quake 3 CTF. Even if you intend to use tactics like 1 def 1 mid 3 attack, the team you are playing against will put you in another position. Either forcing players into chase, playing defensive, going offensive, hiding etc.

There is no such thing as ideal strategies and play. All you can do is create overall strategies and hope the counters you get are minor. And of course relying on individual players / skill to create your cap / defense chances.

I used to have detailed descriptions with screenshots on how our tactics were, but they have gone lost during the years. We went on servers (we also did this in Quake Live for CTF7 + CTF8) to find out what we could use to our advantage strategically and create some nifty tricks to surprise opponents. We took Quake 3 CTF very seriously, especially after being denied one EuroCup and ending 2nd in that OpenCup. Our main motivation for winning the next EuroCup.

You can ask calipt and sol4r, the only two left who experienced that time of hardcore practice and desire to win everything. They can confirm it.

Like BlaD3 said, the problem with CTF at the moment is not enough teams competing. There are only a few top teams and there isn't a single team trying to improve it's play to compete at a higher level. Back in the Q3 CTF peak there were new teams coming up all the time. Look at GoS (1st place in OC and winner of EC after that), S?(1st place OC and 2nd place EC after that) and Broken (2nd place OC and 1st place EC after that). All these teams were formed and rose up from high div2 low div1 to being top contenders in a year. There is nothing like that happening in QL at all.

About the 4v4 versus 5v5 discussion: I don't really care. I just want to play CTF with my clan/friends and have fun on good maps that promote fun CTF play. Maps like CP15 and W3 in 5v5 were awesome cause it promoted intense tactical play with powerup management and proper flagsupporting, instead of CP1 where attackers just brainlessly bash into a tiny flagroom.

About the current maplist:
C7: proven for 4v4, complete shit for 5v5.
C8: proven for 4v4 (although a shit defensive map) not yet proven for 5v5, i'm interested to see this in 5v5.
C10: proven "decent" for 4v4, complete shit in 5v5. The new changes look amazing for 4v4.
C2: proven "decent" for 4v4, absolute TDM bullshit in 5v5.
CP5: proven to be shit in 5v5, probably the same goes for 4v4 cause it's so easy to defend.
CP1: proven for both 4v4 (Americans) and 5v5 (Europeans
Stonekeep: "proven" for 4v4 (Quakecon) should work in 5v5 (because of it's size)

So the majority of maps have been tried and proven for 4v4. The discussion in this thread is just completely missing the point. It's not about which mode is better, but which mode suits the maps better and clearly 4v4 suits all the maps better than 5v5.

I do feel that the biased poll description has probably had an effect here. Also the lack of "don't know/care" option.

If the majority of qlctf players prefer 4v4 then that's fine and I'm not going to try to make them change, but I don't think I'll ever prefer it myself.

I think blade makes a good point saying that more clans would help, with teams would be more equally matches in divisions. If all the players are pretty equal skill wise I can see how the focus on teamplay and tactics can return, rather than 1 higher skilled tdm'er stopping the flow.

possibly because its a completely pointless exercise. but more likely because he plays eu pickups from time to time.

it always amuses me when people use these hypothetical arguments based on individual game situations (like 2def 2 mid 1 att whatever in 5v5) to justify points. It all comes down to - I THINK there are more situations that develop in games that support my point and then the other guy going - no i disagree, there are actually more situations that support my point instead.

take a step back. this poll is entirely subjective. there's nothing to be gained by trying to pretend that its about logic. i havent played "top level" ctf in q3 or ql but ive seen and played enough of both to know that it doesnt really make that much of a difference whether its 4v4 or 5v5 and you can have fun in both altho with vq3 the tendency in tournaments is for most teams to play safe tactics instead of innovating. (this could also be because i got into the scene fairly late and the tourney scene was basically dead so not many teams actually had any incentive to develop new tactics but atleast in ql very very few teams seem to want to try different stuff out).

broken wont play anything anyway as blad3 said on irc. fnatic probably the same, at least i havent saw them competing in any league accept for qcon. and k1ck seems dead aswell. so why are u only counting votes of inactive clans in your favour?

while clans like dp or eo or even GRAND are active and willing to play.

useless to say 'the pro clans want 4o4' when they are not going to play anyway.

and dont come up with the argument 'they stopped playing cause of 5o5' cause these clans were inactive long before this discussing started

I have yet to see DP finish an actual QL league they sign up for. I think broken and k1ck have been the most active CTF teams over the year and now eo is. I think they have more legit means of backing up their opinion about QL CTF than pickup heroes of DP and GRAND.

Fact still remains that America has been playing CTF 4v4 since forever and they've procuded many legendary clans like Cloud9, 519 and now EG, loaded and QUAD. Seems to be working on that side of the ocean. Yet we Europeans are seemingly so stupid and stubborn as to dive directly back into the dark-ages similar to the 2005-and-further age of Q3 CTF with the enforcement of 5v5.

I think we (broken) will skip this first 5v5 CTF season to see how it goes. Now is the time for 5v5-supporters to show the opposition that 5v5 CTF is indeed the way to move forward in QL. If it turns out to be better, more active, etc, then I will tip my hat to you. If not, we should stop bringing up this endless discussion.

In Australia during the Q3 days, we copied the European rule set (using 5v5 etc). In those days we also had more players, more teams and more maps.

With the release of QL, we tried 5v5 as it is what we were used to.. but quickly moved to 4v4 due to the amount of players still around and the maps we are now playing on.

The people refering to 4v4 or 5v5 as "TDM BULLSHIT" are retarded. A single player can make 50+ frags in both 4v4 and 5v5. If a player wants to make the objective frags, then thats what is going to happen - regardless of how many people are on the map.

I think we all need to look at the practical reasons for using one mode over the other. Things that I have already mentioned, such as the maps we have available to us and the players that are available to form teams. I don't know how it is in the EU or US scenes, but in AU - playing 5v5 would mean even less teams and even less competition.

5v5 want players and community from #spontanctf irc pickup and some others, who wants back q3 osp times with complet wcp mappack ( because nobody play OSP now and they are missing it ) and now they are trying bring it back.

Also clan HTF who are now in DIV 1 and many others for example clan dots, quibsm etc wants to play 4v4 in tournaments. So why it should be 5v5? Because this nonsense poll? ( and please not Dem0n's arguments )

The whole ‘ask the pro CTF gamers what they think then go with that’ in my honest opinion isn’t an appropriate method to use to conclude a decision that involves pretty much the whole community in CTF. Especially when majority of those so called ‘pro CTF players’ are inactive/hardly play and pretty much have been complaining for a while regarding other things such as a lack of skilled teams involved in CTF, lack of maps, practice games etc. (broken).

Deji from k1ck saying, “5v5 makes it slower and less flag runs” and “5v5 = Make one cap and play 1 attack, 2 mid, 2 def.” sounds pretty much similar to how k1ck have played on certain maps like CTF7 for example or even CTF8 (Siberia) in 4v4. No disrespect to your team or to you, but most of these concerns you have of 5v5 becoming a lot slower just sounds like k1ck playing 4v4 to me. Each team has a different style of play I agree but, in all fairness CTF7 (ironworks) was probably the most fast paced CTF map currently available till the new ones came out and ‘slow/defensive’ players were not as effective on here than they were on other slower maps such as CTF2, CTF8, CTF10 (deus, stermy, deji, abso, snajp and blade to name a few). Teams such as fnatic, broken and even k1ck to some extent were not great on this map either compared to other ‘slower’ maps like CTF2/CTF8/CTF10. Therefore I’m completely confused why you would be against slow play (if it does become slow) as it pretty much suits most of your styles a lot better.

For me in 4v4 CTF, attacking was a lot easier than it is for me in these 5v5 pickup games/clan games. People are saying more team work/team play is required in 4v4 but on maps like CTF2, CTF8, and CTF10 chances are an attacker will only need to make one frag on the defender to get the flag out and cap without any difficulties. Where is the team play in that? During 5v5 games, chances are a lot higher this won’t occur as much as it does in 4v4, due to there being the extra player making life a lot harder. Other reasons would also be, higher chances of someone spawning in front of you again due to the extra player making life harder. Teams will definitely have to support the flag carrier more in 5v5, to ‘tdm’ their way back to base or to ‘cover’ the flag carrier back to home base. Attackers making solo caps will be merited a lot higher than they will in 4v4 due to it being a lot harder to do a solo cap in 5v5 than it is in 4v4. Defenders will have a very difficult time defending against 3 really strong attackers for example imagine playing DP and you have to defend against dem0n, vertex and besides (ouch – thank god I’m not a defender :D).

The only disappointing thing for me is that CTF7 won’t be played as much in 5v5 as this is without a doubt one of my favorite CTF maps I’ve ever played. This is a map that favours people who just want to play fast-paced CTF, without needing a high consistent aim you will require on maps like CTF2/CTF8 for example. Anyway, this isn’t an opinion of a ‘pro gamer’; it’s just an opinion by someone who’s only played QL at a pretty active level for about 10/11months now, coming into a scene that was ‘4v4’. I did not intend to offend any of the teams/players I’ve mentioned above and hope no-one see’s it this way either.

ctf7 was k1ck's homemap, to my knowledge it is basically one of broken's favourite maps as well, so I don't know where you get your info from. If you want to see the "awesomely defensive and slow gameplay" from both broken and k1ck, go watch the VODs from the first quadcup grand final, where the map ended with a score of 6-2 if I remember correctly.

Also as blad3 already explained earlier, In 4v4, none of the players have set-in-stone positions like in 5v5. In 4v4, the flagdef will often come to mid to help out on getting a cap, the mid will often help for a 3 man attack. All the players need to know their roles at any given time and transition on the map to be effective. In 5v5 you just plant one guy at flag, one guy at mid and have 3 guys run at the enemy base. Also getting 2 attackers to push at the same time requires assloads better teamplay and communication in 4v4 than 5v5.

Because it's your home map doesn't necessarily mean you're going to be amazing on it. You're referring to a quad-cup where only you and eo prepared for it. A team that hardly practiced got into the finals (broken) and you could see from all those games broken played on C7, Blade struggled quite a lot doing home ra + attack on C7. However did really well on other maps such as C2/C8 and C10.

The reason I brought that up is because you're complaining about 5v5 but from what people including yourself have said about 5v5, it would suit your playstyles a lot better.

I don't agree with the whole 'tactics theory' regarding 4v4 giving each players more to do. Tactics only recently changed for CTF7, maps like C8, C2, C10 were still pretty much played the same (the old C10 that is). I've played in games on maps like C8 where i've managed to frag the defender and take the flag all the way back to base and cap while my team are still coming out of my own base. How is that my team being effective? Would that happen in 5v5? Highly unlikely. Also you can't assume what tactics teams will use in 5v5 when everyone has their different styles and so on.

How does 2 attackers pushing in together (4v4) require more teamplay than 3 attackers pushing in together (5v5). I don't see the logic in that? You require more communication for two attackers to attack together than you do for three attackers? lol.

Infact, k1ck would be better in 5v5 because the extra player they would use won't be another beast of a fragger like deji and abso, it'll be ZLC who is a fantastic attacker and would definitely make k1ck into more of an attacking team.

I have no idea how good ZLC is in tdm, but CTF isn't TDM and I know for a fact ZLC isn't really the 'chaser' or 'tdm' type of player when he plays CTF. He's completely focused on attacking and getting that enemy flag. That's what I've gathered from playing against him anyway, I might be wrong though..

Damn. I think i've judged like 5 posts by clicking on that [+] hoping it's the reply button. Anyway, i doubt Ani or ZLC would be happy to find out another heavy aimer has come in to play for them in 5v5. Also, I don't think there's anyone apart from calipt who can frag as well as abso can in CTF.

please, keep your opinion to yourself, being from usa and never having played 5v5 since q3 exists you dont really have any right to comment on this thread and post ignorant bullshit (as expected from NA guy)

Woah! Calm down there man. I know you guys have been saying NA has no business here which was fine, but this now becomes our business as some of us have received emails about next year qcon possibly being 5v5. We are trying out 5v5 in a tourney in NA that should launch pretty soon. Many of us have been playing 5v5 pickup games in recent times as well. We are skeptical but giving it a try. Just thought I'd fill you in. We do have every right to comment here.

it doesn't make any real difference whether it's 4v4 or 5v5, teams will still play defensively either way. if you want to make games more about ctf then you have to change the rules of the game itself in some fashion. which can't be done because iD runs everything.

To be honest guys, I see all mimimi on 5on5 CTF about more TDM, chase, more respawn etc.. etc...

I find it so stupid you know, it's all about the way you play the game mod. People think we have to chase and tdm in 5on5 more than in 4on4, It's all bs!!
You can have in 4on4 CTF, TDM, chase and lucky respawns aswell, look at k1ck CTF team. They play TDM so often during the CTF game.

Look at JapaneseCastles, and ShiningForces, if you are really CTFER, there is no way to midd and chase and bs company, because there is NO MIDD to do. like we had on q3wcp9. We have 2 box on these both maps. All that you need is the pressure of 3 attackers on 2 defs.

Now, about others maps like Stonekeep, ctf8, ctf2, or Courtyard it's enough big to play it in 5on5.
Just go learn how playing CTF then. I will only agree on fact you say ctf7 is too small for 5on5 CTF.
Thx bye.

i played TDM in the very end of CPMA, and the beginning of QL and i stopped due to 2 simple reasons; §1. Maps (Now maybe its worth starting again, but still §2)
§2. the IMBA SHOTGUN. which does nothing but promotes a more campy gameplay
did i accidentaly the whole ctf? (

its mostly dead because the community is a bunch of elitists who cba to adapt to irc based pickups. (they dont want to play with newb scrubs and still whine about the size of the community, how that makes sense i have no idea).

im not super familiar with it as im mostly a cpm player and i only got into vq3 when cpm pickups were not happening (and obviously started ql after it came out). its mostly word of mouth. people do hang out in irc channels but they dont play irc bot based pickups. someone just says ok lets start a pickup, pms all his friends and tries to get a game going. then people randomly join the server and the games keep going. the only advantage i can see for the system is that if u have a community that consistently turns up on these servers (and it used to be easy in q3 cos the pickup servers were fixed), then the games kept going without people having to switch from q3 to irc and back. but then there were usually huge delays between games with people not capping up and delays in picking etc anyway.

and obviously theres a huge downside cos new players could almost never get in any games. i mean having to wait 2 hours to get a game in is a pretty good deterrent against new people. i guess thats what they wanted.

If you look at the results of this poll (at this moment; date/time of this post) and compare it to the results of the poll vor_ posted (from BiBs?), the results are not conclusive.
We can argue with logic and common sense, or as some say, just the (inidividual) tastes people have. As this poll shows, we can go untill forever...
Maybe just *flip* a coin to decide 4v4 or 5v5, and start organizing CTF-cups/leagues!

as u said 'individual skill in 4v4 is way more important compared to 5v5'. ctf is a teammode so teamplay should be most important not some single ego skill.

'in 4v4 I actually have to help the flag carrier and i can als push out to mid' thats even more important in 5o5 cause the more enemies on midd the more support u need as flagcarrier.

like someone who just started playing q3/ql? u mean me? im playing ctf for about 6 years and that should be enough to judge. eventho i didnt played toplevel from the start. i probably got more experience in ctf then u..

imo its just a question of personal taste and there were enough arguments mentioned above pro and against each format. no need for me to repead them all again. the firste league (CB) started to use 5o5 and most of them will probably follow as a majority of the ctf community prefers it. and mentioning the ppl above there are as many good players supporting 5o5. lets end this endless discussing and see how things gonna develop. cause this thread will obviously not decide it.

"as u said 'individual skill in 4v4 is way more important compared to 5v5'. ctf is a teammode so teamplay should be most important not some single ego skill."

But you have to see that the sum of the individuals is greater than the individual itself i.e. as you have more individuals in 5v5, namely two more than compared to 4v4 its impact (of one individual) on the success of the team is less significant. Hence the assumption that the skill of the individual player in 4v4 is more important in 5v5 which is totally justified.

This is easy to understand as a mistake e.g. dying as a defender creates a higher risk for the a potential flagcap. (4v4)

In 5v5, on the other hand, it is less dramatic as you have one who can back you up and help you therefore I can "allow" to make mistakes a defender.

You know that I've played for Team Germany :P and I am pretty sure that you have watched a couple of games. Point being: You have to play nearly flawless as a flag defender in 4v4 to actually keep the base "safe" otherwise you are fucked. I prefer this kind of "pressure".

"like someone who just started playing q3/ql? u mean me?"

No, I don't know you and you should know that.

imo its just a question of personal taste and there were enough arguments mentioned above pro and against each format.

Surely, it has to do with personal taste but it has also to do with the map itself. I really love playing ctf7 but only in 4v4. We have to face that some maps suit some modes better and this problem will always remaind unless we get new maps that "only" are suitable for one game mode i.e. 4v4 or 5v5.

It makes no sense to standardize CTF. To me, it's a game based on map-pool rather than the type of player(s) playing it. By type, I mean aim-heavy or master strategists etc.

Still, I feel 5v5 encourages more camping and results in boring games because the Steal+successful retreat forces the ones securing the courtyard into the enemy base to be in position for the next cap rather than waiting for the capper to return and work his/her magic again. As the team floods the enemy base, all of a sudden it becomes a defensive clusterfuck.

I for one, hate this kind of gameplay because it involves going to the backfoot much too often.

I have played pretty high level for extended periods in both 4v4 and 5v5 (and even 6v6 if we go back far enough!)

So basically, you have 3 variations of CTF listed above already. Great job @ reading!

Unlike Soccer, where the pitch has fixed dimensions, maps of a game are different from each other in size. Why do you think there's a poll in the first place? Because they know the difference exists, so your soccer point came straight outta your ass.

They're trying to standardize CTF but they are confronted by the most obvious problem - Map Size! Back in the day, clan recruitment was done on maps like Q3CTF1 via 1v1 matches. It's because it's one of the smallest maps.

Dem0n, PAINE, headz and some guys from d&p make some poll and then starting to telling people why 5v5 should be better and there you go.. ( really no offence !! just how it works )

Really disagree with 5v5 on CB . My team is not sure if we will play it too. In CB league there will be some teams ofcourse because they want play and there is no other league so they will just play 5v5 although they want play 4v4 ( already asked like 15 teams from CB list , and you guys just cant tell me any team ( except d&p ) who is interested in 5v5 ?

ESR poll is not quality poll just becuase of random users ( active/nonactive/spammers etc ). So everybody can click , and if you read the poll, its looks like people who dont know what its all about, they just click on 5v5 beacuse it seems to be better.

Just wrote me list of teams from clanbase made by admin, and then i can say that CTF community want 5v5 !

this poll is really funny but i dont want to talk about alot of rubbish and a few good comments...

my little cents are...

is it that hard to realize that more players (5on5) => more tp => more chances for 'not top teams' to beat top teams (based on tp) => more teams => more action for spectators => more attraction to the scene => more tournaments => will be a win-win situation specially for a nearly dead ctf scene ?

to maps ctf7 / ctf8 (4on4 / 5on5)...

why are so many players are erroneous convinced about ctf7/ctf8 beeing (good) ctf maps ?

isnt it more like 'qlive beta out - with a map called ctf7 - its unplayble for 5on5 but we play it 4on4 over and over again because no other ctf maps are available' ?

in my humble opinion its time for ID to listen to the nearly dead ctf community and design some new/good ctf maps for 5on5 instead of bringing up old q3 maps

when was CB league , nobody was playing ( d&p failed and didnt played ) and now on pickup channel you can see old players from snuffpickup like you / spacecommander / paine and many others ... its because of maps ?

a div6 team versus a div1 team would lose 20-0 in q3ctf 5v5 so going extreme won't prove your point in any case litium.

I'm talking about close games ending 7-4, 6-3, 5-4, which I find ridiculous scores.

Also basicaly you're saying the same thing as I am. Basically, you're implying that everygame ending 1-0 IS pure luck, which I find also about as ridiculous as you thinking that any game not ending 1-0 is pure luck.
Why ? Because I simply didn't say that.

Lemme paste you what I was saying not so long ago on IRC where I could finally develop my thought about high scoring games vs low scoring games, and also why it is not a valid argument to praise for any gameformat. This discussion involved linkin who did not disagree, or atleast did not find words to. He actually seemed to understand my thought.

Because you will admit with me that most (if not everyone) of the 4v4 protagonists, use this argument about low scoring games beeing automatically boring and random games and high scoring games beeing automatically a true CTF one.

After looking for the logs:

standing on the flag is a strategy
DEM0N: if you do this that probably mean you were ahead in score thus were better than the other team at attacking or taking advantage first anyway
removing that part of the game made it a complete random course of events that eventually lead to high scores (and for some strange unexplainable reason praised by almost everyone) like 6-3 that means little to how a close a game was or wasnt
or 5-3 or whatever example of scores we have now
People also blame those low scores games due to random spawns that occur much more often in 5v5 because there are +2 players playing. But it also happens in 4v4 and eventhough it happened less, it did contribute to luck much more than 5v5 did
in 5v5 you were atleast practically sure there would be spawns in your way, making team escorts an important part of the game
LINKIN: i think 5v5 would be cool IF:
LINKIN: -bigger maps
LINKIN: -kill bind
DEM0N: yeah kill was always something I wanted but ID won't make it I guess
for some odd reason they believe kill was a flaw and had to be removed.
LINKIN: 'kill' was like 40% of teamplay
DEM0N: I have also already explained before in various posts on various forums why in my opinion, kill gave the game much more depth and reduced the luck factor (funny enough, most people think it made the game completely random, but theyre completely wrong, if they would just think about the whole 'risk' part there is in losing time killing yourself)
also if you dont have kill, you're completely at the mercy of luck
during a cross cap, if you get the unlucky spawn and the opponent gets the lucky one, you are already down 0-1, whilst with kill, you could either choose to run by your feet to where you believe you are needed to be (mid e.g.) and thus not taking any risk of spawning 4 times in a row in base (considering spawning takes 2 seconds, you can lose up to 10 seconds, which is usually more than enough on most maps to make a cap)
OR you can take the risk and kill yourself reducing the luck factor by getting the lucky spawn aswell
Conclusion: less randomness, more depth in the game.

kill might also make you spawn ahead of the map, let's take the example of Japanese Castles. You're bored of spawning in base, and running into incoming enemies ? Making sometimes useless fights that you dont want to commit in ? You're enemy is also probably pissed that you spawn in their way. The solution? Kill. You get the chance to teleport yoruself ahead of the incoming offenders of the other team. Consequence ? Game is faster, pressure on the defenders is bigger, less defense heavy games ? You decide.

another good balance that Kill gives is when you want to kill yourself to give the powerup. It was another underestimated balance.You get the powerup, or even the flag, and you want to give it to a partner. Killing yourself was the only option you had, this advantage you gain by giving powerups to a 'item-holder' or 'pu runner' or whatever was beeing balanced by the fact that you actually died and respawned naked with nothing in hand
LINKIN: true
LINKIN: now you can just drop the flag and still cover :/
DEM0N: it even happened that I killed myself to give a decent weapon to a partner. Now I understand that this might not be a spectator friendly feature to kill yourself, but removing it did reduce the depth CTF teamplay had and thus for most CTF lovers/fans it's another downgrade
thats all that comes to my mind now and if it didnt convince you kill atleast wasnt that BAD, then nothing will (talking to deji).
now CTF is still fun to play and I can live without kill... (and basically, my thought is that 5v5 evens out a bit more the random midspawn luck factor by making games more crowded and thus less random midclear caps.)

Ye, cause this needs to be true, cause its coming from an "used to be pro-5v5-players which aint so good anymore" who CLEARLY knows the bigger picture...... Snap out of ur dreamworld, mate. Uve done ur fair amount of "promoting", but the more u type the more ridiculous u sound, started out really good but ure at the point of crossing over to obsessed right now.

funny how he call 4v4 random without one example why its random good arguements :) but you kill or outplay someone in 4v4 its mostly dangerous and can result in cap thats why its alot more skill to not make mistakes. while with 5on5 this aint the case.

i dont need to make bigger most i will only repeat what most people have done allready if you only get your head out your ass and see that there arguements written by people maybe you can finnaly see , maybe you cant cause your ragin blindly without a reason

That was all you saying that, my meaning was simply that u used to be better, but clearly u seem to know a lot more than i do about that matter.

As i said, i dont care about it being 5v5 or 4v4, i simply just dont see the point. if community wants 5v5, so be it and ill wish u the best of luck without me.

Something that's bothering me is that u even dare calling these invalid arguments as proof of what ure saying is right.

take everything u've read and see it from a different perspective and u'll soon come to realize that every argument u had could be turned around from the opposing point of view.

But it does seem to be that ppl refuse to think of aim like a great part of the game, looking at many of the statements made, if u wanna be able to compete with the bigger guys, u need to have some degree of aim to be able to challenge, u cant just count on doing so without aim.

Ure refering to "depth" quite alot, care to explain exactly what u mean a bit further?
If ure refering to knowledge, I can assure u that this, in terms of tactical decisions does occur in both 4v4 and 5v5, just that it can be alot more devastating to pick the wrong route/road of ideas in 4v4, cause theres not another guy around who can clean up after u.

Mostly it all boils down to opinions at this point.

I genuinely hope that whatever format ctf will approach will be the best possible for the community!

I do not in any way try to invalidate your arguments by being condescending if thats what u think, u simply need to see the bigger picture. And yet again, you've got the completely wrong end of the stick, simply put, I'm fine with whatever (even though I probably wont play 5v5)... ctf ain't everything in life, i can live with it being 5v5, something i stated previously, I'm simply trying to get u to understand that ur logic's non sequitur.

The thing is dem0n. There are COUNTLESS posts about why 4v4 is more competetive then 5v5, hence also "better" for the community.

And really, just as draven wrote and just as hazrd wrote. Everything has probably been written over and over again but to be honest, it really feels as if you arent reading them and comprehending why some feel 4v4 is better in different ways. I've read some of the posts here and it seems that alot of the pro 4v4 guys can still agree with you on some things. But with you its 5v5 or go die. Maybe im wrong though.

It's almost as if you are so bent on 5v5 that there really is nothing else in this world.

Anyhow, I respect your opinion and im not here to take anyones side. I just feel that you arent understanding or even caring about what the pro 4v4 guys are saying. BUT again, I could be wrong as I havent read everything in this thread cus its fucking huge :)

Edit: 1-0 isnt luck nor is 5-1. A team should be able to outplay a better team even in the highest of divisions based on just tactics. Which I think is doable in 4v4 but not in 5v5. But theres so many tactics and ways to play this game that sometimes you do get into a stalemate with a team that is trying to either use the same tactics or just plays like you do - 1-0 game. And then you meet a team who has no clue about wtf you are doing, hence you are doing something original, something creative, something new and it throws them off their game - 5-1 game.

For example, when we played DP in the esl-cup on c7, you guys made 1 or 2 quick caps. 2-0. Luck or did you do something we werent prepared on? I'd say u did something we didnt think you would do. BUT then we switched around, changed tactics which suddenly made it 2-2 and eventuelly you barely got out of base to attack which eventuelly resulted in us winning the game.

Now, my question is: Are tactics really as important in 5v5 seeing as most games in q3ctf in the higher leagues ended with either 1-0, 1-1 or 2-1. I compare it to q3ctf since you tend to do it alot.

I dont think its possible to do fast tactic changes or teamplay changes in 5v5 just because that extra guy. Because 5v5 in generally is more of a fragging game/lucky respawn game then 4v4.

If it would make you listen even a split second to any of the pro-4v4 guys I'd love to read the thread and not partially as I have. Theres too much text and too many opinions and even some useless flaming.

when the opposing team makes a mistake, u can capitalize on it by capping....
In 4v4, there's not much room for erros, once u make one, the chance is bigger of capturing

while 5v5, there's more players who can correct that mistake of urs, which leads to a smaller chance of capping

Conclusion: U need to be a better(more complete) player (who can avoid making mistakes frequently) in 4v4 compared to 5v5 if you want to be able to compete at a higher level.

Which leads me back to question ur opinion by typing;
When u can afford making these mistakes to a higher degree without suffering the consequences the chance is bigger to get a highly undeserved victory.. That's why 5v5 is more random to me!

I can reply with : Q3 5v5 != QL 5v5.
First of all, now almost all players can hit easily 30+% with mg or lg and 50+% with RL and RG due to the netcode.

And when I see the amount of FFA/Chase in 5v5 on quite small maps (cp1/cp5/c2/c8) which can be easily played in 4v4, I don't understand the whine on "4v4 is more chasy then 5v5".
Let's be logical.
On 5v5, you have 2 more players on the map, one in each team, so amount of time between two players meet is higher than in 4v4, if the mentality of the players is "whenever I see an enemy I chase him to the death" (it's a caricature of course.) you will have more chase in 5v5.
This involve more kills, so more spawns, so whenever an attacker comes to enemy base, he will be chase by at least 1 or 2 spawns (because of the spawn in QL), so less Flag Action and a possible "All def whine".

Two options :
make bigger maps, like Stonekeep or a bit less big.
bring back 4v4.

At first i voted without even trying it out cause i remembered how fun it used to be with a format of 5, something i started regretting more and more and now i realized that 5v5 does nothing but favor those who couldn't hold up his own weight in terms of those-
-who lacked teamplay of attending at important PUs
-who lacked a bit of aim
-who didn't successfully read the game properly with dealing damage or attacking at the right times

those who thinks 5v5 is less chase/tdm, think again.. its actually 1 more player in each team that is able to their fair amount of chase/tdm

and since the pickups/pcws became 5v5 i have never seen that small amount of flag-grabs in my life, the few that ended up in caps luckily had 3-4 teammates spawning nearby to escort and pick it up once the FC died (isnt luck?:DDDD).

These are my personal viewpoints of the 5v5-format, nevertheless if it turns out to be the future of ctf, and if it manages to florish more than ever, then im deffo rooting for it to be a huge success, even though neither me nor any1 from my team will be wanting to play it.

Enjoy

*After thinking a while i realized that this might actually be what's causing the lack of engagement in ctf, that the top-clans is just too highly skilled, so every1 is being realisitic that they wont ever achieve that top-placement, hence not putting any effort at all into it, its never fun to get 8-0'ed right, so with 5v5 evening out the skill-field and every toptier clan dropping completely it might not be so bad after all*

*oh yeah, here's a few VODs of 5v5 in _QL_ if u like to hear the shoutcasters moan about how 5v5 lacks of action compared to 4v4 which is what theyre used to (americans)*http://quake-live.tv/history.php?range=150 near the bottom of the page, from bibs (Bring It Back Safely) Season 1

I've never played CTF outside of few pickups during the 2002-3 season. I've never managed to get into any sort of divx clan or wanted to.

What I've noticed during the days of q3 ctf and now QL ctf is:
pickup's are getting stale. Stale with player of skill high enough to intimidate people who would be willing to learn.
Public play often enough get's a power player or even to that join up to kick a bunch of noobs, so players with potential dully avoid such opportunities.

CTF teams of div 1 rarely have the time or the will to work on a community besides ranting about it and discussing.
They don't take ppl under their wing, they don't dissolve into div 2 teams to power them up. It's what's missing from CTF.

With discipline, tactic, timing, and being professional about it to the point of you having the edge in the game, comes the low scoring games. Why because many players can adopt the same discipline, same tactics and same sense of professionalism.
If you want fun, you want mindless cess and pure aim and running wild and capping this and that.
If guys like broken and fanatic, LLL, DP, EO, k1ck get bored with playing same games against same teams then stay friends, stay in those clans, but pick up some guys in div 5 and build them to div 3, leave them to get further on their own

I loved every game I saw between div 2-3 teams or div1 teams. CTF fans even if they don't play will watch games and pick their favorites and cheer and expect/get a rush from a good attack or defense.

In conclusion I'll tell you this:
My observing pick would be 4v4. Because I liked what I saw more than in 5v5 games. It's to same extent TDM chase and tactic but it's one less player to TDM and chase and make a tactic with. Which means that there is more room to breathe and more room to switch to 3 man pushes or 3 man defending.

But I don't see things going up for the better. If you judge things by how many players would want to play ctf, with how many of them would probably get to a higher level but they get turned down by lousy public games, lousy pickups and last but not least attitudes of many of players in this discussion (who ever get's offended by this prolly feels like he deserved it, which has nothing to do with me), you'll get the math I'm talking about.

The community as a whole is very different. Back in 2002, there was a sense of competition, where clans from Div2 and Div3 were all aspiring towards being the best and proactively working towards that goal (read: practising).

The current scene is in a state where the best players/clans are bored out of their mind because there is no sense of competition, as blad3 said earlier, even div2 clans will often refuse to practise against the div1 teams.

In 2002, I remember that the top clans would practise several times per week, most of the top clans played pracs on 3+ days a week. Currently I'm not completely sure that there are even teams that practise once every week.

What seems to me as the biggest problem is not the div1 teams, but the div2 and maybe div3 teams.

If you look at it this way, there is a skill gap between public and pickup games, and there is another skill gap between pickup and cup/league games.
The point being in those players that know the game better acting high and all mighty!
It's something to be noticed in this thread also. You have some players from div1 that will share their "pro" thoughts about 4v4 v 5v5v, then you have players with attitudes of div1 who are really div2.

Now I'm not saying they don't deserve to say something about it, as far as I'm concerned everyone has a saying in this.

But when you talk about a community and problems with gamemode, do talk about this problem also.

How come when anyone normal reads this thread he sees div2 players acting massively like an elite? How can any div3-4-5 clans or maybe players wanting to join the community react to this?

-shining forces was a 5on5 ospctf map, but this map wasnt play as often as cp1 or cp9 or even cp15, since this map was very defensive even in osp, i mean since if you put 2-3 people in base its almost impossible to cap vs decent aimers, since everyone can aim abit in Quakelive, this will be even harder.
-troubled waters, was played 5on5 in ospctf aswell, adding two more players will make it more mid rail battles, this map doesnt suit 5on5 at all in Quakelive.
-ironworks 5on5? enough said
-Siberia 5on5, i can live with it, but this map is allready so slow and boring and all about quad, feels like tdm with 2 flags
- Japanse Castles, Actually proper map for 5on5 , tho /kill and spawning in enemy base fucks this map up.
-Courtyard, i have not played the new version but this map was very terrible in ospctf 5on5, this map was the ultimate defensive , in 4on4 it was better but still not great since most spawns are in base and 5on5 adds 2 more spawners in each base this means its very hard to cap to almost impossible to cap
-Stonekeep, 5on5 perfect size for this map cause this map is huge you can even play 6v6 or maybe 7v7 on it

4 out of 7 maps not suited for 5on5 (ironworks, troubled waters, Courtyard,Shining forces)
Siberia is abot of both
Stonekeep & Japanse Castles only maps that i can see as suited 5on5 maps.

when i watched quakecon, i like japonese castles and stonekeep for 4v4 ... for sure its playable in 5v5 too, but thats the same that you can play bloodrun in duel and also in 2v2. There should be some standart for CTF and its ....